44 C.F.R. § 206.435

Project identification and selection criteria

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Identification. It is the State's responsibility to identify and select eligible hazard mitigation projects. All funded projects must be consistent with the State Mitigation Plan. Hazard Mitigation projects will be identified and prioritized through the State, Indian tribal, and local planning process.

(b) Selection. The State will establish procedures and priorities for the selection of mitigation measures. At a minimum, the criteria must be consistent with the criteria stated in § 206.434(c) and include:

(1) Measures that best fit within an overall plan for development and/or hazard mitigation in the community, disaster area, or State;

(2) Measures that, if not taken, will have a severe detrimental impact on the applicant, such as potential loss of life, loss of essential services, damage to critical facilities, or economic hardship on the community;

(3) Measures that have the greatest potential impact on reducing future disaster losses;

(c) Other considerations. In addition to the selection criteria noted above, consideration should be given to measures that are designed to accomplish multiple objectives including damage reduction, environmental enhancement, and economic recovery, when appropriate.

[55 FR 35537, Aug. 30, 1990, as amended at 66 FR 8853, Feb. 26, 2002; 68 FR 63738, Nov. 10, 2003; 86 FR 50678, Sept. 10, 2021]
Notes of Decisions
the City of Friendswood and Kevin Holland v. Paul and Carolyn Horn, Mike and Lucy Stacy, Pete and Judy Garcia and Janice (2016) texapp “44 C.F.R. 206.435(a). The State “establishes procedures and priorities for the selection of mitigation measures” for distribution of those funds to local governments.”
— 44 C.F.R. § 206.435(a) — 1 case
the City of Friendswood and Kevin Holland v. Paul and Carolyn Horn, Mike and Lucy Stacy, Pete and Judy Garcia and Janice (2016) texapp “44 C.F.R. 206.435(a). The State “establishes procedures and priorities for the selection of mitigation measures” for distribution of those funds to local governments.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.